arvan_vod_update_profile
Update an encoding profile by specifying its ID and the fields to modify.
Instructions
Update an encoding profile with the given fields.
Input Schema
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| profile_id | Yes | ||
| fields | Yes |
Update an encoding profile by specifying its ID and the fields to modify.
Update an encoding profile with the given fields.
| Name | Required | Description | Default |
|---|---|---|---|
| profile_id | Yes | ||
| fields | Yes |
Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?
Annotations indicate it is not readOnly, so it is a mutation. The description adds no behavioral details beyond 'update', such as error handling, idempotency, or what happens if the profile_id does not exist.
Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.
Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?
The description is short and front-loaded, but it sacrifices necessary detail. It could be slightly expanded without losing conciseness.
Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.
Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?
Given the lack of output schema and the ambiguous 'fields' parameter, the description is incomplete. It does not explain return values, error conditions, or the expected format of the fields object.
Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.
Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?
With 0% schema description coverage, the description provides no explanation of the 'fields' parameter structure or valid keys. The parameter names alone are insufficient for an agent to construct correct input.
Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.
Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?
The description clearly states the verb 'update' and the resource 'encoding profile', making the tool's purpose evident. However, it does not specify what fields are updatable or differentiate from sibling tools like arvan_vod_create_profile.
Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.
Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?
No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives (e.g., arvan_vod_create_profile, arvan_vod_delete_profile). There is no mention of prerequisites or scenarios where this tool is appropriate.
Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.
We provide all the information about MCP servers via our MCP API.
curl -X GET 'https://glama.ai/api/mcp/v1/servers/dwin-gharibi/arvancloud-mcp'
If you have feedback or need assistance with the MCP directory API, please join our Discord server